BLACK HAWK DOWN REVIEW AT 1/3 OF THE WAY DONE

The book I am reading is Black Hawk Down. The book is a very good representation of modern warfare in the Middle East. So far I am on page 100 or so, but I am really into the book, so to speak. It is very believable, which I think is good for a book based on an actual event is important.
So far, there are not many casualties, but one or two characters that I thought were going to last a lot longer that he did. One guy even fell off the speed rope on a Black Hawk and fell 70 feet. I don’t know yet if he will survive, but he seems to be in pretty bad shape. The soldiers are in Somalia, and many of them are eager for a firefight because there hasn’t been one in a while. They seem to be killing evil Somalians, but some of the chapters are about young Somalians who are just firing at the Americans because they feel like they are intruding on their land without rhyme or reason. I don’t know whether to be on the American side or the Somali side.
I have gotten to the part where the Black Hawk chopper (super six one) got hit with an RPG and fell to the ground. When the army was discussing this, they were not expecting an RPG firing into the air, let alone a Black Hawk. This makes me feel as if the army didn’t really know whom they were dealing with, and these men probably crazy psychopaths who will do anything to keep them out. Is the US blindly going in and killing people who are innocent? They even mowed down a cow with a Black Hawk mini-gun in one of the chapters.
So the chopper is down, and the soldiers appear to be stuck in Somalia. There are other Black Hawks and other vehicles on the ground, but I don’t think that the soldiers will be rescued at all. Due to the fact that the enemy has RPG’s, the Black Hawks will probably want to get out of there as quickly as they can. The tanks, vehicles and such might be blown up, or just unusable. They have found that the supposed war commander they are searching for to be in or near their general area, and the book has used his point of view a few times. Missiles attacked him, but somehow he was able to survive the onslaught.
The book changes many different angles and views as it progresses. It changes from a soldiers view, to a pilots view, and even to an ordinary Somali man’s point of view. There are many soldiers that are introduced in the book, and it is kind of hard to keep track of them all. There are many parts of the book that explain the soldiers, or what they went through while they are in a firefight, something that I think would be lost in the movie if I saw it. It’s nice and juicy, and even though I’m only third of the way through, I highly recommend it.

ON STUDYING PRE BLOG

1.) What are some ways that school encourages or discourages a person's desire to learn? What makes some objects in school exciting and stimulating and others boring?

Everyone is different when it comes to his/her learning style and what they are interested in learning. Ways that schools encourages a person’s desire to learn is teaching them new subjects and ways to gain knowledge. They teach subjects like mathematics, language and literature, art, and other topics that they view fit to teach a child. For a lack of better words, they “put down the foundation of learning,” so to speak. Now, when I say they, I mean teaching up until college.
They teach the basics of learning habits on basic concepts and subjects, but also stifle a person’s desire to learn by only teaching them these concepts. They really don’t allow much leeway in letting a “student*” research and learn what he/she wants to learn. They have a very basic, cookie cutter system that they force the student to follow. This can discourage a person’s desire to learn the specific things that he/she wishes to learn and will use. That being said, I think that it is important to learn the basics, but not to the extent where you have to learn everything by this system. Again, different people have different learning styles and systems, and the basic system that the schools teach them can impeach their creative way of learning and stifle their learning process.
School can make subjects interesting to learn mostly by having a good “teacher**.” All students can probably agree this because it is the teacher who informs you and “teaches” you what is required. If the teacher is able to teach you something in a way that you find enjoyable and interesting, then it will make it easier for you to learn the subject is. Even subjects that might seem boring, a good teacher can take any “bad” subject and make it interesting for the student.
What also help to make objects in school interesting are the student’s own personal interests. Again, each person is unique with his or her personal “objectives” that they want to achieve and topics they want to learn. When a student is engaged in a topic that seems interesting or intriguing to them, they tend to enjoy the class more and most likely do better academically in said class. One student likes one subject, another students prefers another subject. Most likely the subject will be something that the student thinks will help them later on in their near to mid future. Also, this doesn’t have to be a academic idea or class, it can be aspects like people and environments. A student will most likely feel more “at home” in his or her school if they set a nice and friendly environment, or he/she has friends there to talk to and be with.
Aspects that make school duller are the same as what can make them interesting. Teachers can make classes interesting, but can also teach in a way that can be so uninteresting, that the student hates going to said class because they are not engaged and being taught in the way they can learn “properly.” Student’s interests can also create whether or not some aspects seem boring. If a student is not interested at all in the subject she/he is learning or just doesn’t think that the topic relates to them at all, they won’t participate. This subject is seen in their eyes as boring and just busy work that they are doing to proceed through school.
I don’t really know how we (everyone) as a whole can help school become less boring and catch their interest. If we do find a way, it will take a generation to put it into action because it took several generations to create the system we have now.

*I use Student very loosely, and please note that all the other references to student should be written as: “student”
**All other teacher references should be written as: “teacher”

pft...government...

1. Who are your U.S. senators?
Evan Bayh (R) and Richard Lugar (R)

2.Who is your Congressman/Woman?
Steven Buyer (R)

3. Who is your state senator?
Jim Buck (R)

4.Who is your state congressman/woman?
Mitch Daniels (D)

5.Which of these is up for re-election?
Mitch Daniels

6.What are their position/political affiliations?
Mitch Daniels is wishes to help communities with foreclosure and homeless, and to help with child support.

7.Who is running for governor?
Mitch Daniels (R), Andy Horning (L), Jill Long Thompson (D)

YAY

I Pledge Alligance...

The question, “Are all people created equal?” can be twisted into several different meanings and debates. You could argue that we are born equal, but as life passes on, that equality starts to deteriorate or if any physical differences or even social statuses make a difference. This question I think actually poses many different sub-questions, which should to be taken into careful consideration.
In the question itself, they use a very distinct word that I find intriguing, and that is “created.” All men (and women) are “created” equal. This word can also mean born of to bring to existence. So it is implied that you have equal rights when you are born. The question that is brought up from this is do we keep that freedom as we continue to live out our lives, or is it stripped away from us. First of all, I think that yes, we are all born created with equal rights. We might have the same “fortunes” or opportunities as each other, but we all have the same rights as another. Equality can be warped and twisted in different ways. Equality can mean your rights or your wealth, attributes, and other features/ characteristics. I think we are all born differently, and we are definitely are different and unique from one another, but we all share one big thing, our rights (American wise, sorry North Koreans, I got nothing for you.)
Is our equality stripped away from us as we continue to live our lives? Many people do think so and try to solve this problem with different solutions, such as protesting, starting clans, etc. I think that you are still created equal and it sticks with you for as long as you exist, but other people are probably going to try and take your rights away from you, or make you think you don’t have any. You still have those equal rights, but it just feel or seem like it.
This is also another reason why some people might not believe that they have these inalienable rights and liberties is because of other people getting in the way and trying to knock you down. There are two sides to today’s congress, Democrat and Republican, which really don’t have many differences at all, but they just beat the living crap out of the differences they do have and keep blowing them out of proportion that it seems as if you are trying to choose between heaven and hell. Because of this, people are constantly being ridiculed and possibly banished from their social group just because of what they believe in, and the freedom of free speech and free thinking is one of those inalienable rights that people posses which is constantly overlooked upon. We just keep beating and beating each party up and we become more and more farther apart. Eventually, I think we might even have a civil war on our hands if we don’t realize what kind of nation we are creating from this. Many of the constitutional rights are being downsized and exploited because of one another taking a side. We need to ban together and help one another to become an even greater nation.

SUPERSIZE YOURSELF

After watching the film, SUPERSIZE ME, my response was I really honestly do not feel more or less obligated to eat fast food. I knew that this was bad for me to begin with, but what I didn't know was how much this could affect me in a short amount of time. Definitley I feel like I should take my fast food eating down to a minimum. My parents have always told me this, but actually seeing exactly HOW MUCH sugar and fat I intake when I eat that kind of junk is just sickening. Now, the type of food they sell does not sicken me, but how much it can add up. Really though, I prefer Wendy's or Taco Bell, but McDonald's will do in a pinch.
The rest of the world on the other hand, some of them disagree what Morgan Spurlock did. There were NUMEROUS documentaries after his trying out similar diets like he did and investigating fast food. Specifically, there was a documentary about how a woman went on a 30 day Mickey D diet and lost 10 pounds and dropped her cholesterol. This being said, she only took in about 2,000 calories a day, while Morgan Spurlock took in about 5,000 calories a day, and didn't exercise. I have been told by my father numerous times that most of the time it isn't what you put inside you, it's how much you put inside you, or quantity effects you more than quality (weight wise, not health wise). Yes, I believe this to be true, you can eat only salads, but if you eat 5,000 calories of salad every day, you arn't helping yourself. This is one way to look at this.
What I also thought as crazy was several of McDonald's reactions. They took away the super size option at their restaurants, which I think should be a huge accomplishment for Morgan. They also created a new "healthy" breakfast sandwich called th McGriddle, but Morgan said that it had more sugar than the McDonald's cookies. I think that McDonalds knows that what they sell is unhealthy, and the admit that they do, but McDonalds does say that in isn't thier fault that people "overdose" on their food and become obese.
This brings up the question, "Where does personal responsibility begin and where does cooperate responsibility begin?" I think that this is an age old question that will probably be a problem from now until we can finally find a solution we can all agree on. To me, I think that the QUANTITIY of the food you stuff in your face is YOUR responsibility, but the QUALITY of the food you stuff in your face is up to the businesses.

Restless American Blog

Is having a lot of material goods a help or hindrance to happiness? Why are some people able to be happy with little, while others with more are miserable?

In order to be happy, most often people find true happiness in relationships with other friends and other people. Most of the time, this has to do with the meaning behind how you live and what you appreciate in life. Scientific proof would be Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. He created a pyramid of needs that humans need to survive, kind of like a food pyramid to the most basic intent. He states that after physiological and safety needs that social needs are what humans need to survive. It is very important to have this in your life and if we don’t have this need, we can become miserable, and often try to fill that gap with other things, specifically material goods.
When living with a bundle of material goods, you often times only have those material goods, and not an extensive amount of friends or companions. Having many possessions beyond what you need often times makes you greedy, and you start wanting more possessions, and more, and more, and so on. Greed interferes with forming honest relationships, and doesn’t help you acquire personal traits, which helps people want to be around you. You try to find happiness in material things, and most or all of the time you end up unsatisfied and not finding happiness. They spend extensive amounts of time trying to acquire these things and do not realize what they go through to get these things. Often times the journey or events to get said thing have moralistic values, which they are too greedy to consider, they just care about the end product and/or prize. Greed blinds them from what should really make them happy, which is relationships and acceptance.
People who don’t have many material objects seem more happy and optimistic, which might seem strange to the “material man.” The “non-material man” doesn’t have many possessions, and often times he must work harder for them. Because they work hard, and discipline themselves to be focused on getting the basic necessities, let alone fancy goods, they appreciate it more. The harder you work for something, the more you appreciate it. If you are given food right away, then you don’t really care that much about it and fork it down your gullet. If you have to walk 5 miles for food, then you savor it, and it seems like the best food you ever had, even if it was dog food. They put people, relationships, and moralistic values before the end product and/or prize, which is what makes them happy.
But what makes people happy? Well, different things make different people happy. Most of the time if someone has everything in the world, most likely they don’t have is friendships, or people to talk to about what they are interested in. What people want most in the world (which is explained very well by William James) is acceptance and companionship. There are exceptions to this theory (as of any theory), but almost all of the time this is the truth. Sometimes material goods and wealth provide a sense of security, where you don’t have to worry about not being able to afford the basic necessities, but this is mostly outweighed by the pursuit of other material goods.

The Social Me (QUESTION THREE)

Why is it difficult not to care about what others think of you? Do we control the way other people see and think about us?

Why is it difficult not to care about what others think of you? Do we control the way other people see And think about us?

People care about what others think, It is extremely hard to hold one’s image nowadays, but it is still important for almost all people to be recognized and whatever they are or are not categorized. Humans are naturally social, and want to talk to other beings, discuss things with them, and feel comfortable with others. That being said, there are people who don’t really care what others think of them, but they do need attention to an extent. Everyone needs attention; it’s just the degree of attention that differs from person to person. Some people feel that they need attention 24/7, and others just need something as simple as a hello from a friend. If anyone was dropped off on a desert island, they would go crazy eventually because there would be no one there to listen to them, talk to them, and comfort them, except maybe inanimate objects. On the other hand, they would have no one to question them or make fun of them for the things they do.
Another reason one might worry about what other people think is the influence they have on others. If you have a negative appearance, people will think badly of you, and cast you down and make fun of you. No one might want to talk to you, let you sit by him or her, or even deny you as a human being. No one wants to be fun of, so there is always this constant fear that if you say something wrong or something that some may find “stupid”, you restrain from saying it, in fear that you will be ridiculed or made fun of. Humans are very critical beings, and as a result ideas are withdrawn, and fear is always a factor in everyday life.
Now on the subject if we control it or not, it really depends. All people have a their own personal reflection on you based on what they see you do, say, act, and your interests. All of these definitely let people classify you into what “group” they think you seem fit to be in. Now some people are more critical or more “mean” than others, but they still use attributes you have to reach their conclusion. They might make fun of you, no matter what you do to them or what you do to change. They will still be able to make fun of you. This is an example where you cannot help what people think of you. Now, this doesn’t have to be a bad thing. Mothers and fathers normally have unconditional love for their children, and love them no matter what they get into, what they like, they still categorize them as their “special” son or daughter. For the most part, we do have some control over what others think, due to our attributes. You can change little things, like not looking as mean or ferocious by holding a door open for someone or using good manners, but most of your main attributes will still be noticed, whether that is a good thing or not.
In conclusion, there are many ways one might be afraid of what people think. It could result in negative emotions from one’s peers, or wanting to be recognized as a human being and having the same rights. We do to a degree control what others think of see and think of us, but a big part is how the observer views it in their own perspective.

"Freedom or Survival"

Often times it is asked, “Is it honorable or stupid to carry on a fight against overwhelming odds? Is honor more important that life itself?” Well it really depends. The factors that would work into that would be what kind of person you are, what the scenario is, and what you are fighting for. As for honor I think it really depends on the morals that you have. If you can look at yourself every day in the mirror knowing what you have done, staring at your own face and not have a problem with it, you might think it is just fine. But that doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. There might be other consequences that are dealt with. The answer cannot be fully justified with one example.
A time that I could see it be important to fight against overwhelming odds would be in war. I’ve seen many war films where many people fight overwhelming odds to protect what they love and believe in. That is very respectable. Others might think otherwise. They might think that your morals are messed up and you are totally off your rocker. But their morals could be totally off too. I think that it is very honorable and if you believe very hard in what you are doing, it is dying for.
There can be positive and negative effects of being extremely obedient to your beliefs. A positive example would be the American Revolution, which founded freedom of this country. People who believed in freedom and had high morals decided to rebel and fight for what they believed to be the good of the nation. They in turn gave freedom and democracy to the entire United States and created one of the biggest and well-known countries in the modern world. A negative example of this would be Hitler, who believed he was “cleansing” the Earth for the greater good. He thought if he wiped out the people who were weak, deformed, or retarded than he would make a race of strong individuals, like a master race. In reality, he was killing millions of people in the process, including mentally retarded, jewfish, elderly, etc. Most of the time when you are really faithful to your beliefs people, animals, or things start dying. It is all based on the perspective of the person if it is honorable or not. I think that if you believe in what you think, then that is very good. You need to have faith in yourself, but be open and listen to others who might think you are out of whack.
This question on if honor is also based on the perspective. Some people cannot even look at themselves or live with themselves if they don’t have any honor to their names. The Spartans are a magnificent example of people who cannot live without honor. They believed that to die in battle is the most honorable thing you can achieve. Two Spartans were let go and they were ridiculed back in Sparta. I think that if you really believe in something that much to die for it is pretty extraordinary, but for me it really depends on the subject. I would die for my god, someone, and/or something I love, but not for like a Hershey bar.
IT’S ALL BASED ON PERSPECTIVE!!!

THE VINCENT

Hearing this piece made me think of and remember back to when I was in middle school when they school had mentally handicapped children. I don't know what all of them had but I am guessing some of them had down syndrome. I remember sharing and trying to help some of them with their work. Some of them even i was friends with. In fact my brother has small trace amounts of mentally disability in his body. I didn't even notice it until my mom told me only a year ago, and I am just fine with it. He is my brother, and I don't care if he is a genius or a complete idiot. I think that this is sort of a big issue in the world and people need to accept that and just try not to care if someone has it or not.
When the piece was talking about how Vincent locks himself up in his room, it sort of reminded me of me. I like going up into my room and playing my guitar or watching a movie by myself without any distraction. But Vincent did that almost all the time, and I definitely couldn't do that for days at a time. I can only last like 3 to 5 hours or so.
I really think that the music in the piece really fit into the story, it really set the tone. The beginning music seemed a little heavy and dark, which set the tone into a darker, more serious subject. But as it continued, it seemed to get lighter, like a lofty acoustic guitarwhich helps brings some "hope" or makes it seems as if it will have a happier ending, which I think it did.
I think that Vincent (Vinnie) should do what he wants to do, if that means not working, working, if you don't feel like you belong somewhere, you probably don't belong there. Mentally handicapped people also have natural tendencies, and Vinnie didn't feel right when he was in his work, so decided to change it. Do what you love, you know?
I also couldn't help but think of Morgan Freeman when I heard the voice over for the piece. Morgan Freeman does voice overs for so many movies and excerpts. It is sort of the running joke that me and my brother have with voice overs. I wish that he had did the voice over for this piece because he just has the perfect voice for it.
I think that Vincent was bold taking the risk to stop work and he was very brave going back to where he worked. I know some non-handicapped people wouldn't even do that. Vincent is a guy who took a bold risk and just happened to be handicapped. Now, he might of have secretive of why but I think that is understandable to an extent. I wouldn't do that for an extreme amount of time, maybe a few days or weeks. The good news is that now he is working his own little chicken farm and is happy, which is important, especially for someone like him. But we CANNOT have everyone do this. We need people to work to get roadways fixed, heal people, we all have duties to perform, we just need to know when to cross the line.
But what can I say? I think you should follow your dreams (if you can) and just go for broke. Who knows? Maybe you could be working your own chicken farm like Vincent.